Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.

Thanks for sharing that article. Its really a fairy tale read. I was annoyed when I watched the game that resulted in Canada's third loss. I read the article and I''m beginning to think that these four ladies are just plain tired and so emotional. I'm going to stay with them and wish them well in their remaining games. I feel quite sorry for them as I honestly believe they are giving their best and it just isn't working out. C'mon ladies, you've still got a whole country behind you.

quote:Originally posted by misty1 also, since i i was asleep at the time and missed the game can someone fill me in on this rock controversy i see people talking about?

DEN touched a stone (aka burned) after the hogline and CDN choose to remove it, Touched stone did not affect anything! We have all seen it before and every skip just says ok leave it, You can see it on video- cbc archives.

DEN touched a stone (aka burned) after the hogline and CDN choose to remove it, Touched stone did not affect anything! We have all seen it before and every skip just says ok leave it, You can see it on video- cbc archives.

In 2014, both curling teams were allowed to bring the 5ths and coaches of their choice along with a rep from CC for each.

Last year at the Worlds, Team Homan had their regular 5th - Cheryl K and coach/psychologist. They won.

All of a sudden prior to the trials from what I understand, Team Homan is told their 5th is not good enough? Yet Jacobs who won in 2014 had a longtime 5th who did not have Olympic experience. Jone's 5th while experienced had not been to an Olympics either.

My question is why did CC meddle with Team Homan? Koe's 5th has not been to an Olympic games either. I look at the Homan bench and there is Cheryl B who never comes out during the time outs and Renee who does and Adam who is at the end. Very intriguing...

First off, Homan is not classless for removing the burnt Danish stone. Let's make that crystal effing clear.

What is classless is every single poster who has stated such. All you are doing is showing your ignorance of the rules of the sport.

DENMARK broke the rules, not Homan. As such it is Homans choice of the options available to her. Her choice cannot, therefore, be considered sportsmanlike or not.

Poor sportsmanship is on the Danes for REACTING to Homans choice. It is childish and petty on their part to show disbelief or any emotion when they violated a rule and aren't happy with a potential penalty that is clearly outlined in the rules.

Granted, it's a little like a hockey player being allowed to decide how long his opponent sits in the box for a hooking call, but if they don't like the way a rule is written or enforced then take it up with the governing body.

So get off your soapboxes about this. Homan is struggling against teams that have stepped up their game. They don't need a bunch of ignorant armchair aholes judging them for following the rules properly.

Quote
So get off your soapboxes about this. Homan is struggling against teams that have stepped up their game. They don't need a bunch of ignorant armchair aholes judging them for following the rules properly.

I'm one of the many a''holes that was always supportive of Canada and fully aware of Homans ability and past success. Other teams have not stepped up, she has fallen off the cliff. Yes there are rules and there are rules and then there is 100 years of curling etiquette . Other sports do have rules and many infractions/penalties are judgement calls and have latitude.

Homan's style and demeanor was often attributed to youth, but she's not a young curler anymore. She's fine when she is winning, but she cannot resolve the snit. I teach youth curlers to realize when they are watching a game, "They are not happy because they are winning, they are winning because they are happy." Simple nugget that Homan has never been taught. It is unique in our sport. She needs to laugh at herself and learn that it is a game and you do not pull rocks. #omg

quote:Originally posted by jamcan First off, Homan is not classless for removing the burnt Danish stone. Let's make that crystal effing clear.

What is classless is every single poster who has stated such. All you are doing is showing your ignorance of the rules of the sport.

DENMARK broke the rules, not Homan. As such it is Homans choice of the options available to her. Her choice cannot, therefore, be considered sportsmanlike or not.

Poor sportsmanship is on the Danes for REACTING to Homans choice. It is childish and petty on their part to show disbelief or any emotion when they violated a rule and aren't happy with a potential penalty that is clearly outlined in the rules.

Granted, it's a little like a hockey player being allowed to decide how long his opponent sits in the box for a hooking call, but if they don't like the way a rule is written or enforced then take it up with the governing body.

So get off your soapboxes about this. Homan is struggling against teams that have stepped up their game. They don't need a bunch of ignorant armchair aholes judging them for following the rules properly.

I disagree. It was pretty classless. The stone was almost stopped, and did not dramatically get impacted. It wasn't like a takeout where something really got moved and you had no idea what would have happened. I curl quite a bit (not an armchair curler) and have been in the situation many times where the other team burned a stone, it did not dramatically impact the final location of the stone and it did not benefit me; I did not remove it; I would move it an inch or something.

The rule seems to have flexibility so that when it's obvious what would have happened, you can move it to where you think it would have gone, or if you have no idea what would have happened, you can remove it. I don't even think I saw her move the red stone that was tapped (an inch or so) back at all. Her removing it was not in the spirit of the rule, or the game.

Chili Willy (Homan) will no doubt be making some superficial changes for their remaining r.r. games.

1. They'll still take timeouts but they won't bring Sonnenberg out - seems like a big riff has developed.

2. Won't use Cheryl Bernard. Cheryl might be in exc. condition for a 52 yr old woman - but she's no longer a competitive curler. Way too frail to brush, no edge to her retired game. Bad decision to bring her along for the ride.

3. Rachel will get more distant and obtuse as the losses mount. I don't expect more than 1 or 2 losses down the line - but if there's 3 or 4, that tells me a lot about inner composition.

4. The "burnt rock" incident vs. the distracted Danish fawns will haunt them for years.

5. Joan & Mike will continue to praise the individual members of Team Homan - but point out certain things they're doing wrong. But they can't go against them. Its not true journalism to go against your own team in Canadian style broadcasting. Look at how the broadcasters back a pure fop like Patrick "Falls Count Anywhere" Chan?

quote:Originally posted by watcher2 So why is anyone surprised at Canada's ladies poor performance? I've predicted it would happen for years.

Most of the International teams are far better funded. We let them play and mainly live in Canada so they could learn to beat us.

Their coaching was trained in Canada and we paid for much of that training by the millions of government dollars wasted on CAC.

So just what did you think the end result would be? And by the way, if Canadians don't smarten up this is just the beginning.

King Adam is there but if I read the rules correctly he's NOT ALLOWED to come onto the ice during timeouts. Same with Bernard.
Bernard was an awful pick by Curling Canada (ie. Resby Coutts). Yes, she's fit and trim but she's 52, hardly played games this year or last and certainly a woman who's 5'4" and barely 115 lbs can't be expected to brush to the concrete (like Courtney, Miskey & Lise). A very puzzling pick to be sure.
The other teams in the event are daring Canada to put Cheryl on the ice (at 3rd or skip) - frankly I don't think she'd curl 60%.

PS. Also think in retrospect Sonnenberg was a poor pick for coach. Yes, she's qualified but its obvious Rachel & her players don't respect her. Someone like Jon Mead, Wayne Middaugh, even John Epping would have been better choices (in retrospect). Don't know if Mead, Middaugh or Epping would have the necessary qualifications to serve the role.
As for 5'4", 112 lb. fragile brushers - there is one exception, she's 5'2" and maybe 110 - but her name is Kaitlyn Lawes and she's one powerful/dynamic shot-maker and brusher!

I'm reading a lot of comments about this burned stone and I just want to say this. Pretend you're Homan in that game and saying this to yourself. "This is a rule and we're at the Olympics. Better take it off. How man people will be offended if I remove the rock from play, and how many people will say, that rock was burned, remove it." Take about a rock and a hard place. No pun intended.

quote:Originally posted by jamcan First off, Homan is not classless for removing the burnt Danish stone. Let's make that crystal effing clear.

What is classless is every single poster who has stated such. All you are doing is showing your ignorance of the rules of the sport.

DENMARK broke the rules, not Homan. As such it is Homans choice of the options available to her. Her choice cannot, therefore, be considered sportsmanlike or not.

Poor sportsmanship is on the Danes for REACTING to Homans choice. It is childish and petty on their part to show disbelief or any emotion when they violated a rule and aren't happy with a potential penalty that is clearly outlined in the rules.

Granted, it's a little like a hockey player being allowed to decide how long his opponent sits in the box for a hooking call, but if they don't like the way a rule is written or enforced then take it up with the governing body.

So get off your soapboxes about this. Homan is struggling against teams that have stepped up their game. They don't need a bunch of ignorant armchair aholes judging them for following the rules properly.

quote:Originally posted by albetts I'm reading a lot of comments about this burned stone and I just want to say this. Pretend you're Homan in that game and saying this to yourself. "This is a rule and we're at the Olympics. Better take it off. How man people will be offended if I remove the rock from play, and how many people will say, that rock was burned, remove it." Take about a rock and a hard place. No pun intended.

Had she chosen not to remove it and just leave it as is, or given it a little adjustment wack with her broom to the left or right, nobody would be discussing it. Because that's what virtually any other curler would have done in that situation.

I disagree. It was pretty classless. The stone was almost stopped, and did not dramatically get impacted. It wasn't like a takeout where something really got moved and you had no idea what would have happened. I curl quite a bit (not an armchair curler) and have been in the situation many times where the other team burned a stone, it did not dramatically impact the final location of the stone and it did not benefit me; I did not remove it; I would move it an inch or something.

The rule seems to have flexibility so that when it's obvious what would have happened, you can move it to where you think it would have gone, or if you have no idea what would have happened, you can remove it. I don't even think I saw her move the red stone that was tapped (an inch or so) back at all. Her removing it was not in the spirit of the rule, or the game.

If you really have curled quite a bit then you don't pout when you break a rule and the other team exercises their rights under the rule. You made the mistake, not them.

quote:Originally posted by jamcan F
. All you are doing is showing your ignorance of the rules of the sport.

.

Thumbs down.
We all know the rules of the game but most of us also know the history, etiquette and spirit of the game, Even the announcers admitted that this is never done on the WCT but if you want to win that Olympic medal, then I guess it is okay to be an A$$.

quote:Originally posted by nelsosi
Had she chosen not to remove it and just leave it as is, or given it a little adjustment wack with her broom to the left or right, nobody would be discussing it. Because that's what virtually any other curler would have done in that situation.

The Curse of Labonte and K-Mart pulping the ice with fresh corn were both incidents that developed within the rules of the game but never reflected well upon those involved

If you really have curled quite a bit then you don't pout when you break a rule and the other team exercises their rights under the rule. You made the mistake, not them.

You and Ajay? Armchair aholes as mentioned earlier.

Me, pouting? Nope. Doesn't impact me. I'm just making an observation and thinking in the honor, etiquette, and spirit of the sport, what was done does not meet that standard. Within her right and rules to do it? Yes. Being in the honor, etiquette, and spirit of the sport, nope.

And calling someone an ahole makes you even more classless. Better that than a troll, I suppose.

quote:Originally posted by nelsosi
Had she chosen not to remove it and just leave it as is, or given it a little adjustment wack with her broom to the left or right, nobody would be discussing it. Because that's what virtually any other curler would have done in that situation.

You and I would do that along with a lot of other Canadians. I've never been to the Olympics so I won't and can't honestly say that this was a wrong move. But thanks for your comment.